Where there’s a need, there’s a way. Turns out that the biggest number of ENERGY STAR homes are being built in steamy Sunbelt locations where keeping the AC under control is an urgent need.

The top market, with the most ENERGY STAR-qualified homes built since the program begin in 1995, is Houston, with 144,000 homes.

The next top cities with the most homes built to these guidelines include Dallas, Las Vegas, Phoenix and Los Angeles, according to a list released by the EPA, which announced today that there are now 1 million ENERGY STAR-qualified homes in the US.

The ENERGY STAR program requires that buildings take extra steps to conserve energy by using sufficient insulation, a tight building envelop, high-rated windows and efficient heating and cooling systems, making them 15 to 30 percent more energy efficient than homes built to standard code.

Along with passing the 1 million mark, the ENERGY STAR “label” for homes is growing in popularity, said EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson.

“This is an amazing achievement for the Energy Star program – but the real winners are the 1 million American families who have the chance to save money and keep harmful pollution out of the air. That’s great news for anyone who wants to cut costs and protect our planet,” Jackson said. “We’re going to keep the number of Energy Star homes growing, because every new Energy Star home is a step towards lower costs, cleaner air, and communities that are environmentally and economically sustainable. We’re giving everyday American homebuyers the power to lower their bills and join the fight against climate change.”

The EPA, which oversees ENERGY STAR, estimates that the existing ES-rated homes will save their owners, collectively, $270 million on their electric bills this year, while cutting greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to operating 370,000 cars for the year.

The cities with the most Energy Star-qualified homes:

• Houston, TX (144,000)

• Dallas-Fort Worth, TX (103,000)

• Las Vegas, NV (80,000)

• Phoenix, AZ (73,000)

• Greater Los Angeles, CA (57,000)

• Greater New York, NY (25,000)

• Tucson, AZ (19,000)

• San Antonio, TX (19,000)

• Sacramento, CA (18,000)

• San Diego, CA (18,000)

• Columbus, OH (17,000)

• Des Moines, IA (16,000)

• Indianapolis, IN (14,000)

• Austin, TX (13,000)

• Greater Philadelphia, PA/Wilmington, DE (12,000)

• San Francisco-Oakland, CA (11,000)

• Boston, MA (10,000)

• Denver, CO (7,800)

• Orlando, FL (7,600)

• Oklahoma City, OK (7,500)

Want to know more? You can take a virtual tour of an ENERGY STAR home at the program’s website. You also can find an ENERGY STAR builder in your home state or city, using the website’s builder finder.

Earth Day is every day. It truly is, and should be. Still it’s nice to have a special time set aside for this commemoration, now 39 years old.

It gives us a time to celebrate. A time for people who live the issue daily, as foresters, gardeners, organic bakers, fair trade importers, scientists and energy experts, to connect with each other and newcomers on the green path. It’s a time when tree huggers can come out of the forest, composters can declare their love of the soil and all sorts of other quirky “naturalists” can unabashedly rejoice — in an accepting climate.

On this Earth Day weekend (the official day is Wednesday) we met many of these concerned and hopeful people at the Oak Cliff Earth Day celebration in Dallas. We chatted with a guy who’s a person of irony: He teaches automotive arts at a high school, but just got rid of his car to reduce his carbon imprint. Kenneth Cotten plans to bike, walk or take mass transit for the foreseeable future. We met a coffee importer who markets only organic fair trade coffee; a maker of natural soaps and perfumes; a master gardener, an urban forestry expert, a cookie maker, a meter reader expert and a solar panel salesman — all of whom are passionately doing their part for the planet in their jobs and hobbies. They were a joyous group.

There were a lot of dogs at this event. Everyone seemed to be walking a dog or carrying a plant (I guess the cats had to stay home). We saw lots of young people, too, including students from Skyline High School, a magnet in Dallas, who were volunteering for the day at the annual festival at Lake Cliff Park, an urban jewel that was brought back from the brink several years ago.  (That’s Maria Ruiz, Alicia Vega, Marystella Rodriguez, James WIlliams, Ga Corey Eaton and Esther Soto in the picture.)

This Sunday also saw celebrations on the National Mall in Washington D.C., in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, Boston, Denver, Atlanta, Seattle and Austin where the Earth Day Network partnered with Green Apple Festivals. See a video of the event on the Mall on the Green Apple website.

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

Learning not to waste – whether it’s food, electricity or water – is not only good in these economic times, but even more important, it’s beneficial for the environment.

The Nalgene Least Wasteful City Study, released this week, ranks the country’s 25 largest metropolitan areas on wasteful behavior. San Francisco led the group with the least wasteful habits, while Atlanta ranked at the bottom.

The survey of 3,750 people, commissioned by Nalgene (the maker of reusable water bottles), looked at 23 waste-focused habits of city dwellers ranging from recycling and use of public transportation to shutting off lights and eating leftovers. The results were weighted, says Eric Hansen, senior business manager of Nalgene-Outdoor. “We gave more credit to behaviors that had an immediate and significant impact on the planet, such as reduced driving and recycling trash.”

One conclusion of the study is that the easier and more convenient an action, the more frequently it’s practiced. Convenience trumped prudence, the report says. Shutting off lights was easier to do than hanging clothes on a clothesline.

“This study highlights habits that our society has adopted out of convenience, but on a whole can have a huge impact on the sustainability of the planet,” says Hansen.

The survey also notes that despite the economy, saving money is not the main reason urbanites are changing their wasteful ways. More than half of those surveyed said it is their responsibility to ensure the health of the planet for future generations. “Being frugal and helping the planet, these behaviors tend to go hand in hand,” says Hansen.

The top five least wasteful cities were San Francisco; New York City; Portland, Or.; Seattle and Los Angeles. The five most wasteful major cities were Atlanta, Dallas, Indianapolis, Houston and St. Louis.

The good news, according to the study, is that urban Americans are increasingly taking everyday steps to cut waste. The top five areas where most people comply: saving leftover food to eat again; shutting off lights when not in the room; turning off water when brushing teeth; using energy efficient light bulbs; and recycling glass, metal, plastics on regular basis.

The areas where people are less likely to be concerned with wasteful ways: avoiding drying clothes in a dryer, using a rain barrel, composting, taking public transportation and not driving a car for trips that are less than two miles from home.

These latter five areas are what the top cities had in common. For instance, San Francisco residents were not only good about turning off water, but also excelled at not using their car for short trips. The cities that did not score well, were not energy efficient with even the simple things such as recycling. In Atlanta, residents threw out more than two bags of trash each week and didn’t use as many energy efficient light bulbs.

The study, which was compiled over two months by the independent research firm Greenfield Online, also had several recommendations for folks – urban or not – on reducing waste:

• Small changes such as reusable containers and water bottles (not surprising, since that is what Nalgene manufactures) or walking instead of driving.
• Compost yard trimmings and food leftovers. The EPA estimates that 24 percent of the U.S. municipal solid waste stream is made up of yard trimming and food leftovers. Composting avoids filling the landfills and is environmentally beneficial.
• Rain barrels. Even in the city, rain barrels can be installed in a building. They save money on water that can be used to water the yard.
• Bikes. Help the environment and get some exercise by skipping the car.
• Public transportation. Even if using public transportation a few times a week, this has an impact on reducing carbon dioxide emissions.
• Buy used or Freecycle. Thrift stores, libraries, used book stores are all good ways not to waste and to support local businesses. And if there’s a Freecycle group in your zipcode, that’s another good way to avoid waste.

Related story:

• See the full list of America’s least wasteful cities

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

KB Homes announced that all new homes built in Dallas will be built to Energy Star guidelines. The homes, in both new and existing communities, will allow homeowners to reduce their carbon footprint and reduce their monthly energy bills.

According to a report by Whitefence.com, the average monthly utility bills for Dallas households were the highest of the 20 U.S. metro markets surveyed in the report.

“Dallas-area home buyers want quality homes that are energy-efficient, environmentally friendly, and affordable both at the time of purchase and over the lifetime of operating the home,” said Don Barrineau, president of KB Home’s Dallas Division, in a statement.

In February, LA-based KB Homes made the announcement that all home communities opening in 2009 and beyond will be built to the Energy Star guidelines as well. Energy Star qualified homes are up to 45% more energy-efficient than homes built as recently as a year ago.

In order to be designated as an Energy Star qualified home, the EPA-program must verify that the home meets a set of strict requirements. Some of the criteria include effective insulation, efficient heating and cooling equipment, and energy-efficient products such as Energy Star appliances.

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

Advertisement

Post a Job! $25 for 60 days

With the Environmental Protection Agency back in full action again after years of humming in neutral, things are happening, and some important beneficiaries could be America’s school children.

USA TODAY reports today that the EPA is expected to run tests of the air quality outside some 62 schools in 22 states to see whether the sites are polluted beyond healthy thresholds. (See the list of schools.)

The EPA’s sampling comes in response to a USA TODAY investigation that found many schools were located in “toxic hot spots.” The newspaper’s investigating reporters used government records to determine that some 435 schools across the nation were surrounded by air more polluted than that found at a school in Ohio which had been shut down because of its poor air quality.

“Your stories raised important questions that merit investigation and that’s what we’re doing,” EPA administrator Lisa Jackson told the paper on Monday. “We want parents to know that the places their children live, play and learn are safe.”

The testing will take place at schools in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, Dallas and several smaller cities and will cost an estimated $2.25 million.

Many of the schools identified in the USA TODAY package as being in high air pollution zones sit near busy freeways or freeway junctions, or near industrial polluters like steel foundries and cement plants. In some cases, the schools have been located in industrial zones for years; in others, they were recently sited there because no better land could be found or because the land was less expensive. Needless to say, the series pointed out that air laden with smog, heavy metals and other pollutants can be especially harmful to kids whose lungs are still developing.

And that school that was closed? It was Meredith Hitchens Elementary, in Addyston, Ohio — shut down in 2005 after the Ohio EPA found levels of carcinogens 50 times above what the state considered acceptable.

Sure there will be people who say the EPA will just be spending money for naught. Actually, there are already people saying exactly that in comments on the USA TODAY website. We Americans love to trash our federal government.

And after all, what can be done? It’s not like the U.S. could fine air polluters, say under the Clean Air Act. Or cause them to pay for dumping into the atmosphere, through a cap-and-trade or carbon tax program. Or build more public transportation, or cleaner cars, or buses with reduced diesel emissions.

Seems this one issue does raise “important questions” — dozens, or even 435, of them.

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

Photo: AP | Via WABC-TV
> Watch a slideshow of the event

WLS-TV CHICAGO

Photo: WLS-TV

> Read full story at WLS-Chicago

EARTH HOUR 2009 – PARIS

EARTH HOUR 2009 – DALLAS

• Through the dark, enlightenment
• Closing in on Earth Hour 2009
• Earth Hour 2009, coming to a city near you this spring

While the vast majority of Americans are car bound, rising numbers are getting on board with public transit, commuter and light rail, trolleys and buses.

Those riding the rails and buses took 10.7 billion trips on public transportation in 2008, a 4 percent increase over the number of trips taken in 2007, according to a ridership report by the American Public Transportation Association.

During the same period, the number of vehicle miles traveled on roadways declined by 3.6 percent, the group reported, citing the U.S. Department of Transportation.

While the road miles driven could simply reflect fewer people commuting to work combined with lower driving levels resulting from last summer’s soaring gas prices, the APTA sees the increase in ridership as a continuation of a longer term trend.

“Public transportation use is up 38% percent since 1995, a figure that is almost triple the growth rate of the population (14 percent) and up substantially over the growth rate for the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) on our nation’s highways (21%) for that same period,” the association explained in a news statement released Monday.

In sheer numbers, the 2008 ridership was the greatest since 1956; though today’s higher population means the percentage of riders is still much less than it was at that time.

APTA president William W. Millar noted that those switching to public transit can save themselves more than $8,000 a year in gasoline and car maintenance costs, as well as helping lessen their carbon footprint.

“Now, more than ever, the value of public transportation is evident and the public has clearly demonstrated that they want and need more public transit services,” Millar said. “Public transportation is good for the economy, good for the environment and good for energy independence and now is the time for the federal government to increase its investment in public transportation.”

Light rail — which includes trolleys and modern street cars — saw the biggest percentage increases in ridership.

The city of Charlotte, with a light rail system that opened in late 2007, saw an 862 percent increase.

Charlotte was followed by New Orleans’ light rail system, still recovering from Hurricane Katrina, with an annual increase of 218 percent.

The  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has recognized 25 U.S. cities for having the most Energy Star buildings in 2008.

The top 10 are Los Angeles, San Francisco, Houston, Washington, D.C., Dallas-Fort Worth, Chicago, Denver, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Atlanta and Seattle.

Los Angeles ranked first with 262 buildings earning the Energy Star rating, which can be applied to rehabbed and new properties. San Francisco had 194 buildings; Houston, 145; Washington D.C., 136 and Dallas, 126.

Energy Star, the EPA’s label for high efficiency, sets standards for everthing from light bulbs and appliances to buildings.

“An Energy Star building,” says Energy Star spokesperson Maura Beard, “uses 35 percent less energy and emits 35 percent less greenhouse gases than average buildings.”

Looking at the list, it might surprise some to see cities such as Los Angeles, Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston — known more for their air quality challenges than for green building — at the top of the rankings.

Ms. Beard explains that the list reflects improvements in buildings, which will be reflected in air quality gains later on.

“In terms of this list, we looked specifically at [a building’s] reductions in greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change. This is a big concern in states like California and Texas where there is a lot of demand on their infrastructure,” she says.

There were some standout buildings in each of these three cities, she says. She praised a retrofit of a JC Penney store that was built in 1969 in Downey Calif., in Los Angeles County. “They did a beautiful job improving the building’s energy efficiency, starting with its operating characteristics,” says Beard. (Also this week, JC Penney, an early adopter of the Energy Star program with 52 stores that have earned the label, won the first Energy Star Award for Sustained Excellence in Energy Management.)

In Houston, the Green Valley Elementary School involved the student body in its transformation. “Here the kids formed patrol teams making sure lights weren’t left on in the cafeteria and elsewhere when not in use,” says Beard. And in Dallas, the Hines real estate firm, won the Energy Star rating for its Galleria North Tower office building.

The Galleria office building is attached to a spacious, upscale, air-conditioned mall, which raises the question: What about the energy efficiency of malls in general?

“Shopping malls are difficult [structures] to measure efficiency in,” says Beard. “For Energy Star, we collect data from the Department of Energy, then build a model. There are 12 different types of buildings included in the Energy Star ratings. For example, you can’t compare a hospital to a small store. Your have to compare peers, apples to apples.

“For now, we can just measure the efficiency of the anchor stores at a mall. It’s difficult to measure each of the many small stores. We are working with the Simon group, who manages many of the country’s malls, to improve this.”

The EPA reports that in 2008, more than 3,300 commercial buildings and manufacturing plants earned the Energy Star rating. This translates into a savings of more than $1 billion in utility bills and more than 7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions. The structures range from schools and hospitals to office buildings and assembly plants.

More than 6,200 U.S. buildings have qualified for the Energy Star rating in total, says EPA spokesperson Enesta Jones. This represents an annual savings in greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to taking 2 million cars off the road.

Depending on the climate and location, buildings, homes and offices and workplaces, are estimated to be responsible for about 40 percent of the world’s GHG gases.

The Energy Star rating system for buildings is similar to the green certification system devised by the U.S. Green Building Council known as LEED or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Efficiency and Design. But Energy Star is more focused on onsite power savings, while LEED looks at how building materials are sourced and considers broader environmental issues like how close a building is to mass transit opportunities.

“LEED certification tends to be more for new buildings and includes everything, green roofs, supplies and materials, recycling, even the commute,” says Beard. “Energy Star is purely about energy efficiency.”

“It works best if the two [certification systems] are used hand in hand,” she says. “Energy Star is more rigorous in terms of energy efficiency. With LEED, you can get a bunch of points for many different attributes. If a building doesn’t score highly on energy efficiency, it could still earn LEED certification because it might score well on other levels.” (Though LEED standards are currently being tightened and it would be difficult for a building to earn the highest level ratings without being energy efficient.)

EPA’s new chief Lisa P. Jackson is pleased with the results of the Energy Star cities. In a statement released yesterday, she said, “EPA commends all of these cities…[that] are now using more energy efficient appliances and dwellings. They are saving energy, saving money and protecting our environment.”

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

Related stories:

• KTRK-Houston: Go inside Houston’s green school
• KGO-San Francisco: North Bay city makes ‘green living’ a law

Spa guests, already conscious about the health of their bodies, are starting to choose pampering experiences that keep the well-being of the environment in mind as well.

They still want to be indulged, say spa operators, but some are opting for experiences and products that soothe and improve, without nature-damaging ingredients.

Rona Berg, editor in chief of Organic Beauty magazine, says spa guests now look at what is in the products, where it comes from, who produces it and whether it is sustainable. Some even want to know if the company they’re supporting is giving back to the community.

“Consumer demand for healthier, eco-friendly and organic products isn’t showing any signs of stopping,” Berg says. “We’re undergoing a cultural paradigm shift and organic beauty is definitely one aspect of it.”

Americans have spent $7 billion on natural and organic personal care products over the past year, according to the Organic Consumers’ Association, and mainstream beauty brands are, in some cases, removing chemicals like parabens and sulfates, making quality products that skip the toxins.

What does going green really mean? We talked with a few spa operators to find out.

As we drive deeper into our Orwellian future ala Google, where you can practically peer into your uncle’s windows in Toledo via Google Earth, it makes complete sense that we earthlings can now track how we’re corrupting the atmosphere.

Thus, today, you can view CO2 emissions, thanks to a new Google Earth application developed by Purdue University researchers and funded by NASA, the U.S. Department of Energy, the Purdue Showalter Trust and Indianapolis-based Knauf Insulation.

The interactive CO2 emissions map will mostly confirm what you already know – that it’s getting thick out there, especially in cities like Los Angeles, plagued by higher than average auto emissions, and Houston, afflicted with bad air from industrial processes like oil refining. This is readily apparent because the chart color codes carbon pollution from different sectors, such as aircraft, on road and off road transportation; commercial and industrial sources; electricity production and residential emissions.

You can click through the sectors to see how this type of pollution, which comprises the biggest portion of greenhouse gases, is dispersed across the country. You can also drill down to the county level to get actual CO2 readings and a pie-chart breakdown of where they come from – a tool that should prove hugely valuable to scientists, policy makers and climate activists.

Los Angeles County, for instance, produced 22,302,428 metric tons of carbon pollution in 2002, nearly half of which came from on-road vehicles; industrial pollution also accounted for  one-third of the total and residences, less than one-quarter.

Skip to another part of the country, where there’s more mass transit but chillier winters and the pie chart shifts.

In Brooklyn, N.Y., for example, about one-third of the pollution comes from cars, but nearly half comes from residences. Overall carbon pollution there was 2,798,001 metric tons in 2002.

Adjusting for population (LA has about 10 million residents compared with 2.5 million in Brooklyn), Brooklyn still comes out far ahead – or rather behind – in the carbon pollution calculation. It suffers about half as much the per capita overall carbon pollution as LA County.

One could surmise that greater access to mass transit, and denser urban development (which translates to fewer commuting/transporting miles), is part of the reason. But it would take a scientist to run any further with this comparison.

Clearly, though, each city faces different pollution issues. And this is made painfully obvious by the map.

Plano, Texas, a sprawling suburb north of Dallas known for its fine homes, strong schools and high ambitions, is carving out a new facet of its reputation, that of the greenest city in North Texas.

Two years ago, the city of 260,000 introduced Live Green in Plano, a sustainability initiative that encourages its citizens to be good stewards of the environment. “We’re setting the standard in Texas, with our scope of programs and services offered,” says spokesperson Melinda Haggerty.

Under the program, the city has expanded its recycling to reach beyond where most Texas towns go: Plano picks up paper, glass, aluminum and organic scraps from residences and restaurants. It turns the food waste into compost and sells it back to residents at reasonable rates.

The organic waste collection closes a loop in the food chain that helps Plano tamp down landfill waste and return something of value to citizens.

But the city doesn’t stop there. It offers a rebate to residents who improve their home landscapes and reduce water consumption at the same time. Plano residents can earn up to $200 by following the requirements of the YardWise Landscape Beautification Rebate. After enrolling in the program, they must:

1. Attend all four YardWise education classes.
2. Submit the rebate application and photos of the property from before and after the improvement.
3. Show copies of receipts for materials used in the new landscape.

Plano’s sustainability experts recommend that residents planning to make their landscape more sustainable consult horticulture experts to find native, drought-tolerant plants. One web resource they recommend is the Texas Smartscape, a site developed by the North Central Texas Council of Governments to help gardeners find hardy, native plants.

The Live Green in Plano program is sponsored by the city’s Sustainability Department and offers a wide range of green tips as well as promoting a number of community earth-friendly events, says Haggerty. Some of these include: a recent sustainable home improvement seminar; a four-week series of energy efficient workshops co-sponsored by Elliott’s Hardware Store; a home energy efficiency seminar Feb. 21 and a lecture on “10 Steps to a Greener House” on March 5.

Some of the Live Green programs are open to non-Plano residents, says Haggerty. One of these is electronic recycling. “Anyone can participate in electronic recycling which takes place twice a month — on the 1st and third Saturday of every month,” she says. “We work with a recycling vendor who monitors the e-waste and allows us to track where it’s going.” The city’s extra effort helps assure that the electronics don’t end up in a developing country with lax regulations for toxic chemical disposal, a problem that’s arisen in recent years as cities heave off increasingly large mounds of obsolete electronics.

The city also has started a “Material Exchange,” where residents can list items they’re wanting to jettison, in hopes of finding someone who can use the used stuff.  The program lists only items for giveaway and involves non-profits. It claims that it has helped divert 14 tons of material from landfills.

And on April 18, it will again host the Live Green Expo, a gathering of green vendors and home improvement businesses, at the Plano Centre.

Living green means creating a community in which residents conserve resources, minimize waste and reduce toxic products and materials, Haggerty says. Then residents can reap the rewards of healthier ecosystems, smaller utility bills and more environmentally friendly spaces.

The city further defines “sustainability” as meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.

Copyright © 2009 | Distributed by Noofangle Media

The multi-edged issues facing the travel industry as it moves toward becoming more green are not hard to envision. First, there’s that sticky matter of getting there – by jet? by car?

There’s a certain built-in, un-green aspect at the core of tourism.

But that said, there are many ways travelers can be less consumptive and more supportive of eco-friendly practices. They can stay at conservation-minded hotels; places that don’t wash your sheets automatically every day; that serve local food and arrange low-impact tours for guests.

Online travel company Travelocity has taken its first steps toward helping consumers find and patronize greener destinations by launching an eco-friendly directory. The Green Directory aims to help travelers sort the green from the “green washed,” and so far features more than 200 hotels and resorts many of which already claim to be carbon neutral, according to the company.

Destinations in the directory include hotels around the world, in Mumbai, Osaka, Calgary, Ottawa, Edinburgh, Geneva, New York City, Los Angeles, Dallas, Orlando, Montego Bay, Acalpulco and St. Johns. Brand name hotels on the list include Doubletree, Disney, Fairmont, Hyatt, Kimpton and Sheraton.

Not surprisingly, California lodgings are well represented with more than 25 listed hotels spread from San Diego to San Francisco. Orlando turns out to be a green hot spot, also with more than 25 hospitality locales in The Green Directory, including several Disney properties.

It turns out that hotels in U.S. states that have strict green certification programs were ahead of the game because they’d already taken many steps to qualify for their state programs, said Natasha Carvell, director of Travelocity’s Travel For Good program.

In addition to using existing state programs, Travelocity relied on reports from its field managers to develop the list of eco-hotels.

“We’ve asked them, because they’ve been to these hotels, to try to figure out which hotels are walking the talk. They’ve helped us sort out a long list,” Carvell said.